To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Theories about the representation and processing of regular and irregular past tense forms of verbs in English have disagreed as to whether they should be treated as a unified phenomenon (e.g. both rule-governed, or both generated by a connectionist net), or as two distinct types of linguistic entities (e.g. regulars formed by rules of the grammar, irregulars stored in lexical memory). In this article we present data from a positron emission tomographic study in which subjects were asked to produce the past tense forms of regular, irregular, and nonce stems. We find very different amounts and areas of cortical activation in the regular and irregular tasks, as well as significantly different reaction times in producing the past tenses. We interpret our findings as supporting the grammar/lexicon theories, and discuss the implications of our results for general linguistic theory.
Numerous attempts have been made to place restrictions on the occurrence of formally definite NPs in English existential there-sentences. The wide range of definite NPs found in this construction, however, precludes any (noncircular) characterization of such a definiteness effect based on linguistic form alone. Nonetheless, previous functional analyses of definites in there-sentences have also failed to account for all of the problematic data in a unified way. We present an account of existential there-sentences in which the postverbal NP is required to represent a hearer-new entity; based on a large corpus of naturally occurring data, we identify five types of formally definite yet hearer-new NPs that may felicitously occur in there-sentences. The alleged restriction against definite NPs in there-sentences is shown to be the result of a mismatch between the cognitive status to which definiteness is sensitive and that to which the postverbal position in there-sentences is sensitive.